If a skater scores 5.8/5.8 there is room for ELEVEN more skaters ahead of them. 5.6/6.0, 5.7/6.0, 5.8/6.0, 5.9/6.0, 6.0/6.0, 6.0/5.9, 6.0/5.8, 6.0/5.7, 5.9/5.9, 5.9/5.8, and 5.8/5.9 are all higher scores.

Oh god, and now this? Of course these are the possibilities, but how likely?

5.9/6.0? I don't see any in SLC with the skate of their life that can get this kind of sjucore.
5.9/5.9? Really?
6.0/6.0? Really?
6.0/5.9? Really?
6.0/5.8? Really?

So basically, there are a bunch of combinations that can place someone ahead of Hughes, but the probability is nil/nit/zero/nada. Even if Katarina jumps like Midori, I doubt she would get these kind of scores. So no, there is no room. Door closed.

Exactly. What the judges had in mind is pretty obvious. If Michelle skated cleanly she would get 5.8, 5.9 irregardless of if she did the triple toe-triple toe or triple-double or not, maybe 5.7, 5.9 from some judges if she didnt do the triple-triple which would still place her above Hughes. Then if Slutskaya skated cleanly she would either get 5.9, 5.8 or 5.9, 5.9 depending if the judges felt her performance deserved to be placed 1st or 2nd behind Kwan. The only realistic possabilities of scores from most judges are the ones not involving a 6.0 so- 5.8, 5.9, 5.9, 5.8 and 5.9, 5.9, that is it. The judges were not going to want to pre judge Irina's final placing before she even skated, and 5.9, 5.8 makes no sense for Sasha who is a stronger presentation than technical (although the presentation of her LPs in 2002 still needed ALOT of work) so that leaves only 2 combination of marks, and those were for the 2 obvious ones, not Sasha. With marks of 5.8, 5.8 for Hughes already the judges were not going to go higher than that for Cohen with the 2 favorites still to presumably fit above that. Maybe 2 or 3 would have at most, but that is it. As I already noted her marks were very low for only 1 mistake as it was, mostly 5.6s technical and 5.7s in presentation, for her only mistake being a fall at the back end of a triple-triple attempt very low marks, and most judges had her .2 or .3 behind Hughes in the scores (a couple even more) and skaters dont typically lose that for only 1 fall back in the 6.0 days. Contrast that to Kwan who didnt attempt a triple-triple, fell on a very important triple (triple flip), and two footed another triple, and still took 3 judges ahead of Hughes, and 8 of 9 ahead of Cohen, and had higher presentation marks than Hughes (and much higher than Cohen).

On another note had the Olympics been anywhere else Cohen would have finished behind Suguri as she had all season long, and especialy when Suguri's LP in SLC was clearly better from nearly every perspective. The only reason Sasha was even a real contender was the Olympics being in the U.S. Her skating had a long ways to go still at that point, although her short program in SLC was pretty good I admit.

5.6/6.0 and 6.0/6.0 are unrealistic scores to consider (although the former shouldn't be), I'll give you that, but the rest are perfectly viable. Slutskaya certainly could have been scored as 6.0/5.9 or 6.0/5.8 if she nailed her planned content and Kwan obviously could have received 6.0 on the second mark if she skated perfectly. So, there were 10 realistic scores the judges could have been expected to give to Slutskaya or Kwan that would have put them over Hughes. 5.7/5.9 for Kwan would have been an acceptable score even if she didn't skate perfect and that would have put her ahead of Hughes. Even with the fall a couple judges placed her ahead of Hughes.

Originally Posted by pangtongfan

On another note had the Olympics been anywhere else Cohen would have finished behind Suguri as she had all season long, and especialy when Suguri's LP in SLC was clearly better from nearly every perspective. The only reason Sasha was even a real contender was the Olympics being in the U.S.

Entirely wrong. Cohen was easily seen as the more talented skater, a one-of-kind skater. And Cohen did more Triples than Suguri in SLC, so how was the latter "better from nearly every perspective", when Cohen was already seen as superior with regards to Spirals/Spins/Ice Presence? That makes no sense at all.

BTW, at the 2002 Worlds in Japan, Cohen fell twice in her Long Program and pretty obviously two-footed a jump, but still received nearly the same presentation scores as Suguri.

Mirai and Caroline cannot be thin and willowy, so their only option is to try to get stronger.

That's not necessarily the right answer. If you go read Dorothy Hamil's book, you will see that sometimes there's too much "get stronger" (she talked about what was considered good off ice in the mid-70s and how she put on too much muscle in some areas to jump effectively). There's an optimum place for each skater and it's different for each skater.

Agree. I've questioned Caroline and Mirai's fitness levels in the past, but they both look fit and in-shape now, they just simply aren't willowy or wiry in their build anymore, but rather curvier, with more solid looking muscle.

I don't think that Nagasu looks like she has dense and toned muscles at the moment.

Zhang looks to be in good shape. She has thunder thighs but they way they look, I think it's dense muscle and not fat.

Originally Posted by Blades of Passion

BTW, I loooove the Italian judge's scoring of the LP at this event. He marked them as 1. Hughes, 2. Kwan, 3. Cohen, 4. Slutskaya. Perfect.

No, it's not perfect. Hughes' combinations were cheated, she had a terrible flutz and weaker basics than many of the skaters in that event. It's ridiculous to place her first under any judging system. And Kwan second? After that flawed, uninspired skate?

No, it's not perfect. Hughes' combinations were cheated, she had a terrible flutz and weaker basics than many of the skaters in that event. It's ridiculous to place her first under any judging system. And Kwan second? After that flawed, uninspired skate?

Hughes combinations were not cheated in SLC. The first was fully rotated, and the second was within the 1/4 rotation short to qualify as fully rotated under CoP, and as for her basics, Sarah has some of the strongest basics skating of the ladies. Her posture was an issue as was the flutz, but not her basic skating skills which were very strong.

No, it's not perfect. Hughes' combinations were cheated, she had a terrible flutz and weaker basics than many of the skaters in that event. It's ridiculous to place her first under any judging system. And Kwan second? After that flawed, uninspired skate?

Exactly. Those were ridiculous rankings, hence why that judge was reprimanded and threatened with a suspension after the event.

No, it's not perfect. Hughes' combinations were cheated, she had a terrible flutz and weaker basics than many of the skaters in that event. It's ridiculous to place her first under any judging system. And Kwan second? After that flawed, uninspired skate?

The only jump in Hughes' program that would perhaps deserve the < call is her 3Sal. Both of the 3Loops in combination were there. Her basics were good. Her positions were excellent. Her performance was lovely.

I didn't find Kwan's performance to be uninspired. It was flawed and bit nervous, yes, but she still displayed excellent quality. Her basics and overall choreography were better than Cohen's and EVERYTHING she did in terms of the "second mark" was better Slutskaya's robotic crap.

Originally Posted by pangtongfan

that judge was reprimanded and threatened with a suspension after the event.

No they weren't? What are you talking about. LOL?

I see you're still holding on to Slutskaya's gross SLC performance, though.

Hughes combinations were not cheated in SLC. The first was fully rotated, and the second was within the 1/4 rotation short to qualify as fully rotated under CoP, and as for her basics, Sarah has some of the strongest basics skating of the ladies. Her posture was an issue as was the flutz, but not her basic skating skills which were very strong.

3S/3L - 3S is between 0.25 and 0.5 short. 3L is a full 0.5 short.
3Z - Between 0.25 and 0.5 short, probably closer to 0.25
3T/3L - 3T is about 0.25 short, 3L a full 0.5
3T - Would be fully credited, <0.25 short

The US telecast did not show her jumps in slow motion and she did a very good job of hiding the under-rotations. I think she should have won based on how skating was judged under 6.0 but I can't argue with the fact that almost all of her triples were < or <<. If you watch the video and disagree then you probably aren't being objective.

Note to Blades of Passion, I have had you on my ignore list for half a year now so in the event you seemingly keep typing directly behind me means you are responding to my posts, I do not see your posts (unless by the unfortunate chance someone quotes you), I have no interest in your posts, and you are best to stop replying to mine as you are merely wasting typing space.

Note to Blades of Passion, I have had you on my ignore list for half a year now so in the event you seemingly keep typing directly behind me means you are responding to my posts, I do not see your posts (unless by the unfortunate chance someone quotes you), I have no interest in your posts, and you are best to stop replying to mine as you are merely wasting typing space.

I'm not a mod but I don't think this belongs on the forum. You should send this through private message. Respectfully, I do not care one bit who you are ignoring and I highly doubt anyone else does either.

Additionally, if Blades of Passion is responding to something you say and quotes you, just because you don't see it doesn't mean no one else is interested in her/his thoughts on the topic or his/her thoughts on what you said.

I agree it is really irrelevent when if you are a reader of posts and someone posts something and than someone responds to it it is irrelevent if one of those people is ignoring the other! Obviously if the responder is looking for a back and forth but a back and forth may not be sought. It is just a response to an idea or thought and back and forth may be irrelevent

I would have blocked half of this board by now if I wanted to not think about annoying posters. That's not the purpose of a message board, though. All that blocking someone achieves is a removal of objective analysis and argument from the equation. You can't just block people you disagree with, you have to counter their arguments so that your own viewpoint becomes widely seen as the correct one (or so that your own viewpoint, *gasp*, changes). If you don't do that, then they just keep spewing out opinions you find incorrect, and what good is that for the community?

3S/3L - 3S is between 0.25 and 0.5 short. 3L is a full 0.5 short.
3Z - Between 0.25 and 0.5 short, probably closer to 0.25
3T/3L - 3T is about 0.25 short, 3L a full 0.5
3T - Would be fully credited, <0.25 short

The US telecast did not show her jumps in slow motion and she did a very good job of hiding the under-rotations. I think she should have won based on how skating was judged under 6.0 but I can't argue with the fact that almost all of her triples were < or <<. If you watch the video and disagree then you probably aren't being objective.

A Triple jump is 2.25 rotations in the air at minimum. Her first 3Loop leaves the ice facing diagonally left from the direction of the boards the camera is placed at (.125 rotations, 1/8th of a rotation, also known as 45 degrees). It lands facing diagonally left from the direction of the boards opposite to where the camera is placed at (again, .125 rotations, 1/8th of a rotation, 45 degrees). That amount of rotation, when including the other obvious 2 turns in the air, totals 2.25 rotations. She met the minimum requirement for an acceptable Triple jump.

Her second 3Loop was better than the first, there's no question about that one. The 3Salchow in the program is the most questionable jump (along with the 2Toe in combination) because of the very swingy entrance and the top of the skate perhaps touching down a bit early. If you look at the rotations closely there, it may be short of the 2.25 minimum.

I would have blocked half of this board by now if I wanted to not think about annoying posters. That's not the purpose of a message board, though. All that blocking someone achieves is a removal of objective analysis and argument from the equation. You can't just block people you disagree with, you have to counter their arguments so that your own viewpoint becomes widely seen as the correct one (or so that your own viewpoint, *gasp*, changes). If you don't do that, then they just keep spewing out opinions you find incorrect, and what good is that for the community?

A Triple jump is 2.25 rotations in the air at minimum. Her first 3Loop leaves the ice facing diagonally left from the direction of the boards the camera is placed at (.125 rotations, 1/8th of a rotation, also known as 45 degrees). It lands facing diagonally left from the direction of the boards opposite to where the camera is placed at (again, .125 rotations, 1/8th of a rotation, 45 degrees). That amount of rotation, when including the other obvious 2 turns in the air, totals 2.25 rotations. She met the minimum requirement for an acceptable Triple jump.

Her second 3Loop was better than the first, there's no question about that one. The 3Salchow in the program is the most questionable jump (along with the 2Toe in combination) because of the very swingy entrance and the top of the skate perhaps touching down a bit early. If you look at the rotations closely there, it may be short of the 2.25 minimum.

If you measure where her pick hits the ice and where her blade starts to flatten out she is > 0.25 short on every jump except the last 3T. I could take screenshots but it's pretty clear if you pause you can see she finishes 0.3 to 0.6 of the rotation on the ice. They would all (except the 3T) be < or << today, but it was fine under 6.0.

If you measure where her pick hits the ice and where her blade starts to flatten out she is > 0.25 short on every jump except the last 3T. I could take screenshots but it's pretty clear if you pause you can see she finishes 0.3 to 0.6 of the rotation on the ice. They would all (except the 3T) be < or << today, but it was fine under 6.0.

You can keep saying this but that doesn't make it true, because you are providing no reference point. Short of what exactly? You have to specifically look at where the jump starts and you have to understand that 1/2 a turn of pre-rotation is just naturally part of how these jumps work.

Her jumps are absolutely not .5/.6 of a rotation short like you claim. An ideally rotated Salchow/Loop is 2.5 rotations in the air. You're saying those jumps are rotating 1.9/2 turns in the air. This is simply incorrect.

Most of the jumps in her program are borderline, I'll give you that, but you have to give benefit of the doubt. I maintain that only one of those triples would have deserved the < call. Not to mention, you have to consider the difficulty of these jump combinations. A clean 3Sal<+3Loop combination is still quite praise-worthy.

Her performance was lightning in a bottle. It deserved to win this competition. The fact that a performance like this might lose to Slutskaya's performance under the scoring system of the past 7-8 years is exactly what's wrong with the sport now. Please give me Sarah's gorgeous "Level 1" Layback spin any day of the week over most of the "Level 4" Laybacks we see these days.